yet another mil issue but not my fault (?)

[hayjon]

Hi, brief bit of background to start: dh and myself married very quietly a few months back (no dc's as yet). Anyway, mil (widowed) and his extended family all live at least 200 miles away from us and are basically scattered around country.
I don't have a close relationship with mil but she is allright and I neither hate or love her, she's OK.
About a month ago, she called dh to say that she wished to arrange a family gathering to celebrate our marriage, cue many phone calls between them to discuss the event. Mil very, very keen to do what we wished- must stress that I didn't really mind what happened- free meal, day out in nice surroundings, well I didn't care that much for the EXACT details so left it to dh to speak with his mum.

Anyway, basically a day before the gathering her and dh speak on phone and had a massive falling out because she didn't plan the event according to any of my dh's wishes and we didn't go after all. I tried to reason with dh to go but to no avail as I knew a lot of effort had been made. Although I kind of see why he is a bit peed off as she made such a fuss ringing all the time for no reason. He is not spoilt, either. Don't think he cared if she'd made a fuss or not-just hated having her ask him in depth what he wanted and then being ignored IYSWIM.

According to his brother, his mum is v. v. upset and we received a letter from her today saying that it was obvious to her that NEITHER of us wanted to go. This is simply not true; but what the heck could I have done? Gone by myself without dh? I am annoyed with her to be honest for this.
I don't know if I am BU or what or how to sort this.

Well, I hope that they sort it out & that it doesn´t unnecessarily put you & MIL on a bad footing, hayjon

Does your DH really dislike his mother as per your post of 14:29? If so I'm surprised she wanted to hold a shindig for you. Sounds more like it was for her benefit.

diddl, Maybe it was the final straw for him or something- years of being ignored by her (not physically but mentally) and she could not even be bothered to do this one thing for him i.e. a football match.

It is a long way away from us, we would have stayed overnight; this football match would have taken a small part of afternoon. A chance to catch up with his male relatives. The celebratory meal would have been later.
I don't think he was asking too much. Really I do not.

It was for her benefit- she makes a big show of asking what other people wish and not delivering it, she must think it polite or something. I don't think it polite; I think it worse, much, much worse than not asking at all.
It's as if she thinks being 'half polite' better than nothing, when, in fact, it is worse. Just like it would have been worse if only ONE of us had shown up.
It's just rude asking what somebody wants and totally ignoring it.

If she had simply said, 'Folks this is what I am arranging, like it or lump it' my dh would have had no problem at all. It could have been a meal at McDonald's he would not have cared at all- he'd have even missed the football!

Op I can relate to your DH

My brother asked my father what he wanted for his 65th birthday

he said
"small immediate family only"
brother replies (paraphrased)
" us 3 siblings, partners and DC"
Dad says
"yup, but no cake, no silly surprises."
Brother says
"OK"

on the day we all turn up to the resturant.
we find
immediate family as above
brothers ILs not just mum and dad but brother, wife, and there 3 DC
huge cake, and a band that plays happy birthday, sung by the entire fecking place

given that there is "history" between dad and said family was it really right to ignore what that person wanted?

I would like to know thou when he was told of the final arrangements, you may have said but I'm only on page 4

Oh for goodness sake, the match would have been in the afternoon sometime for all of 90 minutes, the blokes would have gone to the pub, the females would have gone for a cream tea or something and we'd have all then showered and gotten ready for the proper meal.
Why the f*ck is this so unreasonable?
We did not want a bloody wedding with all the trimmings, fgs, why the hell would we want a traditional set up for a meal that took place months after the event?
It's the principle for god's sake, she asked and asked and asked went along with my dh and then, at the last minute, declared that the pub was not good enough for her. She is small-minded and bourgeoise.

So, you both decided to humiliate her for a misguided principle?

I'm sorry to say this but neither of you sound very nice.

I feel like I've landed in some Stepford Wife nightmare with some of the posts here:

It is YOUR fault if your dh does not do what he should! Even when he is in the WRONG, it is your fault for not getting him to do something. By this logic, a woman is responsible for her dh's behaviour and is thus responsible if he hits her. NOT. NOT. NOT my view (and, I'm sorry, but it is right to use this as an example).

You should still make a tit of yourself and martyr yourself to an extremely uncomfortable situation even if your dh is in the wrong and gets to sit at home.

All weddings -and any meals connected to weddings must follow a certain pattern. WRONG. They follow the pattern of what the wedding couple want and nobody else and, if you are not prepared to take their opinion into account, you shouldn't insult them by asking and then ignoring them.

clam, sorry, but this is irritating. I was all packed and ready to go and WOULD have gone. It was HE who decided to act out of 'principle' not me.
Tried to reason with him, shouted a lot, he would not budge. Maybe I should go and whip myself for not being able to persuade him otherwise or something...

Well then I partly don´t understand why he didn´t organise to see the match & then go to the meal afterwards.

I would say that often a wedding couple often only get what they want if they are hosting tbh.

Hindsight is great, but perhaps your husband should have just said no to his mum from the outset

Who has said it was your fault that your DH does not do what he should?
My point, pages back, was that you might have been able to persuade him - there are ways and means, but I certainly did not mean in some Stepford Wife way. God knows my DH can be pig-headed at times, but the bottom line is that he loves me and respects my opinion so if I made my point on something like this, he would chunter about it but agree to come along. Not that he would have hurt his mother like this in a million years. After all he's a decent bloke.

Actually, I'm getting more and more sympathetic towards the OP's POV.

"It's the principle for god's sake, she asked and asked and asked went along with my dh and then, at the last minute, declared that the pub was not good enough for her. She is small-minded and bourgeoise."

Your words, I'm guessing. Which implies it's a principle you're not at odds with.

And I'm no marriage guidance expert, but I reckon that shouting at him was possibly the worst way to try to persuade him!

No. You are responsible for your behaviour. That's why you shouldn't have colluded with him. Which you did.

All this domestic violence crap you are coming out with is not helping you one iota.

And, to be honest, many weddings compromise a bit for the sake of parents. It's a massive deal to most mums and dads and a day which they look forward to for years with great joy and anticipation - rightly or wrongly that's how it is. Many people will make a small concession. You and your husband didn't even have to make one . And you couldn't do that for the sake of simply DOING THE RIGHT THING.

"you can always tell what a man is like by the way he treats his mother"

Really
a very simplistic view

Oh Hayjon, I was starting to feel sorry for you but your last 2 posts have made me less sympathetic as you do seem to now be trying to stand up for your DH and justify his behaviour.

I'm not sure if that is because you've had a hard time here or because actually you do deep down think that he was in the right

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and hope it's the former.

Colluded? Indeed. Exactly how did I how collude with him? By not going? Honest to goodness, for the millionth time, I could not go.

I find it deeply ironic razzlebathbone, that you blame women for not being able to control their dh's and accuse them of 'collusion', yet accuse me of talking crap about domestic violence when, in fact, I am being logical.

Surely if I should have been able to persuade my dh to go I am at fault if he fails to do as I wish in every circumstance? So if he hits me, I am partly to blame? According to you it is, after all, I have got to control my dh at all times, haven't I (wtf?!)

And stop the wedding nonsense. THIS WAS NOT THE WEDDING!. It was a little meal a few months after it.

My God can you imagine if you decide to have children; the Christenings, visits, birthday parties. You will have to hire a party organiser to plan it to the last detail - how your DH wants the arrangements, decor and whom he wants to attend. Maybe a guest list would suffice?

You sound like one uptight pair. Do you actually realise the meaning of gatherings like this is to have fun and share some joy and positivity as a family, whatever minor differences have occurred?

I really think this whole drama has been quite significant in highlighting the negativity you have married into and, in a sense been implicit in. This is very early days and I imagine things like this will happen again and again. You must love him a lot and you sound like very loyal wife regardless.

But you can still all have a good time and a good drink/laugh/bonding session or whatever he wanted without the football.

I can't stand my MIL; she's quite frankly a nutcase. But the MIL's behaviour is largely irrelevant (unless she's dangerous/psychotic/downright evil plan). You do what is right. Be the better person. Anyone would think she'd organised a public stoning for them!

"It was a little meal a few months after it."
I bet your mil didn't view it in that way.

"for the millionth time, I could not go." Yes, you could have. You chose not to. Plenty of posters on here have said that, in your circumstances, they would have gone. You've implied they're insane and that it's a ridiculous idea. I would say it's ridiculous that a grown woman says she "can't" drive 200 miles!

It's like this- please, please excuse capitals but perhaps it is only way of getting through.

I AGREE THAT MY MIL WAS OUT OF ORDER, HOWEVER, HER UNREASONABLENESS WAS NOT ENOUGH TO STOP ME FROM GOING. I WOULD HAVE GONE. MY DH WOULD NOT GO, HE FELT DEEPLY OFFENDED. I TRIED TO REASON WITH HIM THAT WE SHOULD GO IN SPITE OF HIS OFFENCE. HE WOULD NOT LISTEN. BEING STUCK BETWEEN A ROCK AND A HARD PLACE, I DID NOT GO, EITHER.
Clear enough?

We know it wasn´t the wedding.

But it was a celebratory meal hosted by MIL for your husband´s relatives who weren´t invited to the wedding.

That´s why it was perhaps unlikely to be exactly the way that your husband wanted.